ADA Tejas Mark-II/Medium Weight Fighter

[tejas warrior]

It's the other way around, because MK1A mainly upgrades available systems in the same airframe. For MK2 you need to design and develop a new airframe first, then need to integrate the new systems (engine, avionics and hopefully EW), flight test and certify it.
But then again MK1A, is still dependent on achieving FOC first and that's the real milestone we need to achieve.

Don't agree. Mk2 is a upgrade of Mk1-A.

Mk1 & Mk1-A will serve purpose of testing all new development.. e.g Uttam is getting integrated in LSP2. So it will be an easy integration.

It's similar to upgrade path of Gripen C > Gripen E.. No ??

 

[Sancho]

Don't agree. Mk2 is a upgrade of Mk1-A.

Nope, MK1A is an upgrade of the MK1 version and based on the same airframe.
HAL proposed the 1A, by taking those parts of the MK2 upgrades IAF wanted, that can be integrated into the old airframe, without major modifications. Pulse doppler radar gets replaced by AESA, old EW parts with new once, possibly also old cockpit MFDs with newer once...
This is just a gap filler to bridge the time for the development and certification of the new MK2 airframe, that includes several internal and external changes, as well as completely new systems.
The whole point of MK1A was, to keep the production line running, while an MK2 can be developed, otherwise the production would stop in 2022 after FOC was delivered and would start again only somewhere around 2027.

So MK1A is the easy part of the MK2 requirements, but the harder part is still to come.

 

[Steven Rogers]

Won't 1 metre length increase be compensated by increase in other dimensions as well? Aster all, the ratio is what matters, not merely one dimension. Even wingspan will increase and the weight adjustments and aerodynamic adjustments will be made.

Adding Canards will hamper the size of the wing and increase wing loading. Also, MK2 will have lower length than Gripen E by 1 metre, despite increase in length over MK1 by 1 metre. So, lesser room for canard.

Note, that NLCA has Levcons to assist in landing by increasing drag and hence helping in short landing. The concept of canard is not unknown to ADA but deliberately avoided in LCA and instead focused on cranks.

Their won't be any canard on tejas, the best they should do is use LEVCON on MK2 airforce version too.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

 

[Kshithij]

Their won't be any canard on tejas, the best they should do is use LEVCON on MK2 airforce version too.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk

Yes, it is LEVCON vs Crank. It is down to that - which of the two is better? I am unsure of the cost benefit analysis.

Canard is ruled out as Tejas Mk2 is about 1-1.5 metre smaller than Gripen E and hence there is not enough space for canard

 

[Sancho]

Whatever you have written has been discussed multiple times in this thread.

Nothing new which we haven't read.

So if it was written, why were you under the impression that MK2 development is easier, although it includes a complete redesign of the airframe?
It's not enough to be an LCA fan, you also have to understand the issues to know why things take longer, or why things are done in the programme the way they are. Ignoring facts (and that's all I provided, without any reference to other fighters or programmes), just because you don't like it, doesn't help Tejas.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

I have read what you have posted, worth appreciating but you quoted some outdated reports also some assumptions of some journalist who is known now to be a pro US lobby ..

Really, that's all you see??? It was you that didn't knew the difference between MK1A and MK2, or why the latter is more difficult to develop, that's why I explained it to you.

I only added the detailed informations, to give you and other members a proper base to understand, where the MK2 requirement came from, why we ended up with the MK1A instead and what the latest official info's and time lines are.

It's ok, if you can't appreciate the effort, but at least don't make up unrelated stuff!

So if it was written, why were you under the impression that MK2 development is easier, although it includes a complete redesign of the airframe?
It's not enough to be an LCA fan, you also have to understand the issues to know why things take longer, or why things are done in the programme the way they are. Ignoring facts (and that's all I provided, without any reference to other fighters or programmes), just because you don't like it, doesn't help Tejas.

 

[Sancho]

I have read what you have posted, worth appreciating but you quoted some outdated reports also some assumptions of some journalist who is known now to be a pro US lobby ..

Of course there are old reports included, since the MK2 development, or the problem that made it necessary didn't started yesterday. Not to mention that it can't go more official or recent than the CAG report of 2015, DM Parrikars official statements, just as the HAL Chief himself giving details on LCA MK1A.

 

[Sancho]

Its not a redesign of the wing. A redesign will mean almost a new plane

I never said that the wings get redesigned, it's the center fuselage that gets completely new!

- additional gap behind the cockpit
- new internal layout to house the new engine, fuel tanks and avionics
- larger air intakes to provide more airflow
- drag and weight reductions (hopefully)

All this changes the aerodynamics and weight of the fighter, which logically translates into new test and certification phase, because it effects the flight performance.
MK1A changes on the other side, only include modifications on the available MK1 airframe, therefore should not require flight testings after achieving FOC anymore.

 

[Kshithij]

I never said that the wings get redesigned, it's the center fuselage that gets completely new!

- additional gap behind the cockpit
- new internal layout to house the new engine, fuel tanks and avionics
- larger air intakes to provide more airflow
- drag and weight reductions (hopefully)

All this changes the aerodynamics and weight of the fighter, which logically translates into new test and certification phase, because it effects the flight performance.
MK1A changes on the other side, only include modifications on the available MK1 airframe, therefore should not require flight testings after achieving FOC anymore.

So what? Let there be new tests. The design is the same but with scaling difference. This will entail some modifications in FBW but can be done quite quickly as they need not write it from scratch. Already an algorithm exists which can be modified. Tests don't take too long unless it is a sabotage attempt

 

[Kunal Biswas]

That`s the reason i appreciated, though i also pointed out about the quotes which are outdated and false, Without going into depth details which are already present in this very thread ..

==================

No larger intakes, This has been discussed in this thread already quite long ago ..

Of course there are old reports included, since the MK2 development, or the problem that made it necessary didn't started yesterday. Not to mention that it can't go more official or recent than the CAG report of 2015, DM Parrikars official statements, just as the HAL Chief himself giving details on LCA MK1A.

I never said that the wings get redesigned, it's the center fuselage that gets completely new!

- additional gap behind the cockpit
- new internal layout to house the new engine, fuel tanks and avionics
- larger air intakes to provide more airflow
- drag and weight reductions (hopefully)

All this changes the aerodynamics and weight of the fighter, which logically translates into new test and certification phase, because it effects the flight performance.
MK1A changes on the other side, only include modifications on the available MK1 airframe, therefore should not require flight testings after achieving FOC anymore.

 

[tejas warrior]

AMCA and Mk2 has been sanctioned. Hopefully funds will also start to flow in soon.



Source - Indranil @BR

 

[pankaj nema]

AMCA and Mk2 has been sanctioned. Hopefully funds will also start to flow in soon.



Source - IR@BR

what is IR ; I know BR

 

[patriots]

AMCA and Mk2 has been sanctioned. Hopefully funds will also start to flow in soon.



Source - IR@BR

Bhai u r too fast

I was just going to post .....

bdw thanks...

hope will see both mk2 and amca...soon

 

[tejas warrior]

what is IR ; I know BR

Source - Indranil @BR

Source - Indranil @BR

 

[tejas warrior]

Bhai u r too fast

I was just going to post .....

bdw thanks...

hope will see both mk2 and amca...soon

Congratulation !!

If its true, Its best that can happen to LCA & AMCA.

 

[patriots]

Congratulation !!

If its true, Its best that can happen to LCA & AMCA.

imho India should produce both mk2 and amca
as mk2 is single engine and amca is twin engine....which will give a lots of confidence and will create an era ...
hope for the best

and we should wait for the official confirmation.

 

[pankaj nema]

ADA should not worry about Avionics for the MK 2 version

Just Put MK1 A avionics with 414 Engine and make it ASAP

Tejas has only one weakness ; limited Combat radius

With 414 engine you can have more internal fuel

 

[Kshithij]

ADA should not worry about Avionics for the MK 2 version

Just Put MK1 A avionics with 414 Engine and make it ASAP

Tejas has only one weakness ; limited Combat radius

With 414 engine you can have more internal fuel

That is exactly what is being done for Mk2 and AMCA both regarding susbsystems. Only engine difference and airframe difference exists

 

[tejas warrior]

imho India should produce both mk2 and amca
as mk2 is single engine and amca is twin engine....which will give a lots of confidence and will create an era ...
hope for the best

and we should wait for the official confirmation.

+ When you have stealth tech developed for AMCA, move on from MK2 > MK3 with stealth features.

 

[Kshithij]

+ When you have stealth tech developed for AMCA, move on from MK2 > MK3 with stealth features.

Stealth requires design in airframe and aerodynamics. Tejas is already stealthy and has RAM coating too. I don't understand what do you mean by MK3. MK2 has high amount of composite, no canards and is small in size. What more addition do you want?